Case Digest (G.R. No. 173399)
Facts:
In Central Bank Board of Liquidators v. Banco Filipino, G.R. No. 173399, decided on February 21, 2017, the Central Bank Board of Liquidators (CB-BOL) sought to annul the Court of Appeals’ affirmation of the Regional Trial Court’s orders admitting Banco Filipino’s Second Amended/Supplemental Complaint in three consolidated civil cases (Nos. 8108, 9675, and 10183). These cases originated in 1984–1985 when the then Central Bank of the Philippines (CB) placed Banco Filipino under conservatorship (MB Resolution No. 955), receivership (MB Resolution No. 75), and liquidation, prompting Banco Filipino to file separate actions for annulment. On December 11, 1991, this Court, in G.R. No. 70054, nullified the receivership order and ordered the CB to reorganize the bank. By virtue of Republic Act No. 7653 (New Central Bank Act of 1993), the CB was abolished and replaced by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) and the CB-BOL, which took over untransferred assets and liabilities. Banco FilipCase Digest (G.R. No. 173399)
Facts:
- Background and initial proceedings
- In February 1963, the Monetary Board (MB) of the Central Bank (CB) issued Resolution No. 223 allowing Banco Filipino (BF) to operate as a savings bank (formal operations began July 1964).
- On July 27, 1984, MB Resolution No. 955 placed BF under conservatorship; BF filed Civil Case No. 8108 in RTC Makati for annulment.
- On January 25, 1985, MB Resolution No. 75 closed BF and placed it under receivership; BF filed Civil Case No. 9675 in RTC Makati.
- On March 22, 1985, CB placed BF under liquidation; BF filed Civil Case No. 10183 in RTC Makati.
- On August 29, 1985, the Supreme Court (SC) ordered consolidation of Civil Cases Nos. 8108, 9675, and 10183 in RTC Branch 136.
- On December 11, 1991, the SC nullified MB Resolution No. 75 and ordered CB to reorganize BF.
- Legislative changes and amendment motions
- R.A. 7653 (1993) abolished the CB, created the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) and the CB Board of Liquidators (CB-BOL) to liquidate remaining CB assets.
- Pursuant to the SC order, BSP reopened BF on July 1, 1994. BF filed an Amended/Supplemental Complaint (1995) substituting CB-BOL for the CB and claiming at least ₱18 billion in damages.
- RTC Branch 136 admitted the Amended/Supplemental Complaint on March 29, 1996.
- On September 25, 2003, BF moved to admit a Second Amended/Supplemental Complaint adding BSP and its MB as defendants and alleging new acts/omissions from 1994 onward.
- RTC granted the motion (January 27, 2004; denied reconsideration July 20, 2004). CB-BOL petitioned CA for certiorari (2004).
- CA dismissed the petition and affirmed the RTC (January 27, 2006; denied reconsideration June 27, 2006).
- CB-BOL elevated the case to the SC via Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari (filed 2017).
Issues:
- Did the RTC err in admitting BF’s Second Amended/Supplemental Complaint that added BSP and its MB as parties and alleged new causes of action arising after the original complaint?
- Did the addition of BSP and its MB comply with the amendment rules (Rule 10) and joinder rules (Rule 3, Sec. 6; Rule 2, Sec. 5) of the 1997 Rules of Court?
- Must BSP and its MB, as alleged successors or transferees pendente lite of the CB, be impleaded in a separate action or can they be joined in the ongoing consolidated cases?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)